Astron. Astrophys. 363, 837-842 (2000)
2. Lensing properties of the DLA absorbing galaxy/quasar pairs
The observed characteristics of the seven quasar/galaxy pairs are
presented in Table 1. We present three different methods to
evaluate the lensing properties of these seven configurations:
(i) a model-independent formalism; (ii) a formalism
which assumes a Singular Isothermal Sphere (SIS) lens model, only
based on the geometry of the systems (i.e. redshifts of the quasar and
the galaxy in each association and their angular separation);
(iii) a formalism which assumes a SIS model whose velocity
dispersion is determined from the observed luminosity of the DLA
galaxies and the Tully-Fisher relation.
![[TABLE]](img28.gif)
Table 1. Characteristics of the seven galaxy/quasar pairs: quasar emission redshift , apparent magnitude in the F450 filter (similar to the B band), DLA line redshift , neutral hydrogen column density , angular impact parameter , linear projected impact parameter , k -corrected absolute magnitude and its estimated 1 error of the absorbing galaxy (see
Boissé et al. 1998 for details). The last column provides the galaxy morphological type, derived from the WFPC2 images as precisely as possible.
The values of the angular impact parameter
and absolute luminosity
of the absorbing galaxy image were
obtained by Le Brun et al. (1997) and
Boissé et al. (1998).
No secondary lensed QSO image is detected in any of the systems
presented here at more than 0.3" from the quasar, down to a limiting
magnitude of , i.e. 6.8 to 9
magnitudes fainter than the main observed QSO image. The absence of
any secondary image either means that the lensing configuration is
indeed not capable to produce multiple imaging, or that the apparent
luminosity of the secondary image is too faint to be detected,
possibly due to extinction by dust.
2.1. (Nearly) model-independent constraints
Subramanian & Cowling (1986) showed that, for a spherical mass
distribution, with surface density decreasing from the center to the
outer parts, as expected for individual galaxy halos, a
sufficient and necessary condition to have multiple
images is that the central value is
larger than a critical value defined
by:
![[EQUATION]](img34.gif)
and thus independently of the model chosen for the halo. In this
relation, c is the speed of light, G the gravitational
constant, ,
and
the angular-diameter distances
between the observer and the source (QSO), the observer and the lens,
the lens and the source, respectively. Furthermore, they show that the
absence of a secondary lensed QSO image ensures that
still for a spherical mass
distribution. They conjecture that this result is also valid for
centrally peaked elliptical lenses. We therefore conclude that the
absence of a secondary QSO image at a separation larger than
in our sample ensures that
over such an angular scale.
On the other hand, for a lens with circular symmetry, the mean
surface density within the Einstein radius
is equal to
(cf. Schneider et al. 1992); in
addition, the location of the main image is always such that its
angular separation from the lensing galaxy
. In particular, this relation is
true even in the case of multiple images with any secondary image
being hidden due to extinction by dust. Consequently, we can derive an
upper limit on the projected mass
enclosed in a disk of radius
centered on the galaxy, as
![[EQUATION]](img45.gif)
and thus also on the average M/L ratio within
.
No constraint can be set on the amplification A of the QSO
image.
2.2. SIS lens model with only geometrical constraints
We here assume that the distribution of matter within each galaxy
can be described as a singular isothermal sphere (SIS), whose volume
mass density is given as a function
of the distance r to the galaxy center by:
![[EQUATION]](img48.gif)
where is the 1-dimensional
velocity dispersion of the SIS. As a consequence, the total projected
mass enclosed in a disk of radius r is
![[EQUATION]](img50.gif)
We then compute the angular Einstein radius for each quasar/galaxy
configuration, by
![[EQUATION]](img51.gif)
In the case of an SIS, the observed images are located at:
![[EQUATION]](img52.gif)
where is the true (unobserved)
position of the source.
Multiple (double) imaging only occurs for
, in which case the separation
between the two images is , and their
amplification is . If
only one image is formed and its
amplification is .
Inversely, even in the case of an isothermal sphere with a
core-radius, Narayan & Schneider (1990) showed that the condition
is sufficient to avoid the formation
of multiple images. Using only the geometry of the system, we can set
the following constraint on the mass of the DLA galaxy. We
successively consider the cases of single and double image
systems:
2.2.1. Single image system
If only one image is present, .
Using Eq. 4 and inverting Eq. 5 imply that:
![[EQUATION]](img61.gif)
The only constraint on the amplification affecting the observed
image is .
2.2.2. Double image system
Suppose now that two images are actually produced by the lens. In
order to explain the observations, we have to assume that only the
brightest image is detected, while the faintest one is affected by
dust extinction by an amount so that
its apparent magnitude is fainter than the limiting magnitude of the
corresponding WFPC2 observations.
The angular separation between the observed image and the center of
the lensing galaxy is such that
. Consequently, the total projected
mass located within a disk of radius
is constrained by:
![[EQUATION]](img65.gif)
Let us define as the difference
between the limiting magnitude of the corresponding WFPC2 frame and
the magnitude of the main observed QSO image:
. We then have the following
relations between the amplifications of the two images I and B of the
quasar:
![[EQUATION]](img68.gif)
where and
are the extinction affecting the
main and secondary images, respectively.
Since the secondary image can be very close to the center of the
deflecting galaxy, it might be extremely extinguished, and thus
undectable on our data.
2.2.3. Summary
Only using geometrical quantities with a SIS lens model does not
greatly improve the limits based on a model-independent formalism: the
value is within a factor of two the
upper limit of the mass of a SIS lens only constrained by the angular
separation between the lensing galaxy and the quasar, independently of
the fact that multiple images exist or not.
2.3. SIS lens model constrained by the Tully-Fisher relation
In this section, we consider one additional piece of information
brought by the HST observations: the luminosity of the galaxies
considered to be responsible for the DLA absorption.
If we assume that the 1-dimensional velocity dispersion of the SIS
is equal to the velocity dispersion
of matter in the galaxy , which is
related to the maximal value of the
rotational velocity of a galaxy by ,
we can indeed use the Tully-Fisher relation (Tully & Fisher 1977)
to derive its value from the galaxy luminosity:
![[EQUATION]](img76.gif)
where
km s-1,
(h is the Hubble constant in
units of 100 km s-1 Mpc-1), and
; these values are in accordance with
the work by Fukugita & Turner (1991) and SCS. This relation is
derived from local galaxies, but most recent studies (see Bershady
1996 for a review) indicate that there is no evolution of the
parameters in this relation at intermediate redshifts. Then, even if
the value of is known to evolve with
redshift (see e.g. Lilly et al. 1995), this only indicates an
evolution of the density of galaxies of a given luminosity, but not of
the relation between the luminosity and the velocity dispersion of a
given galaxy.
We can then set an upper limit to the projected mass enclosed in a
disk of radius centered on the
galaxy, as Eq. 4 becomes
![[EQUATION]](img81.gif)
We can also estimate the amplification factor
of the quasar apparent luminosity
due to gravitational lensing by the galaxy responsible for the DLA
absorption, as is derived by
inserting in Eq. 5:
![[EQUATION]](img85.gif)
The values of and
derived for each of the QSO-galaxy
association are presented in Table 2. As expected, the inferred
mass-to-light ratios , also listed in
Table 2, are close to the mass-to-light ratios for spiral and
elliptical galaxies at the present epoch estimated by various,
classical methods (see Bahcall et al. 1997 for a review). This result,
discussed further in Sect. 3.3, ensures us that the values
obtained for the amplification factor
are probably good estimates.
![[TABLE]](img95.gif)
Table 2.
Lensing properties of the seven quasar/galaxy pairs. Symbols are defined in the text. The TF upper-script indicates that the corresponding quantity has been evaluated with the Tully-Fisher relation. Calculations have been done using km/s/Mpc, , , and no correction for extinction.
© European Southern Observatory (ESO) 2000
Online publication: December 5, 2000
helpdesk@link.springer.de  |